Ferguson vetoes anti-crime program as Washington's theft crisis worsens

Just days after signing a nearly $80 billion state budget, Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson is facing backlash for vetoing a relatively small $500,000 request aimed at combating organized retail crime, despite evidence that the program was already working.

The decision is drawing fire from lawmakers, law enforcement advocates, business groups, and even members of his own party who say the veto undercuts public safety while the state moves forward with massive spending, new taxes, and cuts elsewhere.

Last year, lawmakers approved $1 million to launch pilot programs in King, Snohomish, and Spokane counties to coordinate efforts between retailers, police, and prosecutors targeting organized retail theft. The initiative focused on increasing reporting, improving law enforcement response, assigning prosecutors, and diverting eligible offenders into alternative programs.

The results came quickly. According to a January report from the Washington State Department of Commerce, the program “was highly effective in strengthening the overall response” to organized retail crime.

In just the first five months of 2025, the impact was substantial: 5,868 organized retail crime reports were filed, law enforcement responded to 402 incidents, nearly 1,200 suspects were identified as eligible for diversion, and about 10 percent ultimately entered diversion programs.

This year’s $500,000 request would have expanded the effort into Pierce, Skagit, Clark, Whatcom counties, and the Tri-Cities.

Supporters say the program filled a critical gap at the local level, complementing, not duplicating, a statewide organized retail crime unit Ferguson created as attorney general. A broad coalition of business and public safety groups warned the governor ahead of time. Democratic Rep. Mari Leavitt said on X that organizations, including the Washington Hospitality Association, Washington Retail Association, Tacoma-Pierce County Chamber, Washington Build Black Alliance, Northwest Grocers Retail Association, WACOPS, South Sound Chamber, and the Washington Organized Retail Crime Association, signed a joint letter urging Ferguson to preserve the funding.

“The Governor has heard,” Leavitt wrote. “If he vetoes after knowing the concerns in advance, then that’s on the Governor and his office will own it.”

He vetoed it anyway.

In his veto message, Ferguson cited budget pressures: “While preventing incidents of retail crime is important, our state’s fiscal situation necessitates tough choices.”

Critics aren’t buying it. The veto comes as Ferguson signed a nearly $80 billion budget aimed at closing a projected $2.3 billion shortfall through mid-2027, while lawmakers also approved tax increases, including an income tax, and tapped emergency reserves and pensions for first responders. At the same time, millions were cut from child care and education.

Against that backdrop, opponents argue, axing a $500,000 public safety program that showed measurable success makes little sense.

Leavitt called the move “such a shortsighted decision” and said she was “deeply disappointed and puzzled.” Washington currently ranks number one in the nation for retail crime, with an estimated $3 billion annual impact on businesses and the state economy. Beyond financial losses, the crimes have created growing safety concerns for workers and customers and added strain on small businesses.

Leavitt pointed to concrete gains from the pilot program. From January through June 2025, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office filed 142 retail theft cases, 2.5 times the average over the previous four years. Prosecutor Leesa Manion attributed the increase directly to funding that allowed the office to bring on an additional prosecutor.

Other counties used the funds to strengthen coordination and expand diversion-focused responses. Data from the Washington Retail Association shows the pilot generated hundreds of law enforcement responses, hundreds of diversion offers, and thousands of crime reports in just months. “This is remarkable success for a pilot program,” Leavitt said. She warned that halting funding now risks undoing that progress.

“Vetoing this…undermines our public safety efforts,” she said. “It leaves our small businesses at risk and does nothing to help customers and workers feel safe.”

For critics, the issue goes beyond the dollar amount. In an $80 billion budget, they argue, the veto signals that even small, proven public safety investments can be cut, while larger spending priorities remain untouched. Now, with the veto in place, expansion of the program is halted, and the question remains why a proven, low-cost effort to combat a growing $3 billion problem was among the cuts.